Why even Kim-style psychophysical laws are impossible

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 80 (3):225-237 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

If the mental is subject to indeterminacy, does this rule out the possibility of psychophysical laws? One might think so. However, Jaegwon Kim has argued for the existence of a kind of psychophysical law that is not obviously susceptible to problems posed by indeterminacy. I begin by introducing a weak and relatively uncontroversial indeterminacy thesis. Then, by appealing to constraints on theories of strong supervenience and to general considerations about the nature of indeterminacy, I argue that even Kim’s laws cannot accommodate indeterminacy. The result is an argument against the possibility of Kim‐Style psychophysical laws

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Psychophysical laws.Jaegwon Kim - 1985 - In Brian P. Mclaughlin & Ernest Lepore (eds.), Actions and Events: Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson. Blackwell.
Honderich on mental events and psychoneural laws.Jaegwon Kim - 1989 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 32 (March):29-48.
Multiple realizability and psychological laws: Evaluating Kim's challenge.D. Gene Witmer - 2003 - In Sven Walter & Heinz-Dieter Heckmann (eds.), Physicalism and Mental Causation. Imprint Academic. pp. 59.
Mind in a Humean World.Jens Harbecke - 2011 - Metaphysica 12 (2):213-229.
All God Has to Do.Tim Crane - 1991 - Analysis 51 (4):235-44.
Some Anomalies in Kim’s Account of Davidson.Alexander Miller - 1993 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 31 (3):335-44.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
69 (#231,631)

6 months
10 (#257,583)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references